Comment Promoted on Sight and Brain and Shroud of Turin Images

imageYannick Clément writes:

I know many people will not love what I will say here, but I don’t care ! I’m not here to make friends but to express my point of view !

I just want to say this : In science, every conclusion MUST have a scientific confirmation from AN INDEPENDENT researcher or research team. In Shroud science, IT IS EXTREMELY HARD to find this kind of independence of mind because almost every scientist who’s interested in the Shroud believe it is the genuine Shroud of Christ and have some preconceptions ideas about the subject. I don’t think we can say that this work of Marion found his scientifically independent confirmation yet !

And sorry, but many of those kind of articles and researches about those kind of images (flowers and coins) are often done to confort the agenda that is to prove the resurrection using the Shroud. Why ? Because it is proven that the Corona discharge can produce an image of coins on linen. So the stretch isn’t to long to associate the image of coins produced by Corona discharge and the resurrection of Christ ! I think there’s a real danger of biais there.

I dream of the day when Shroud science will be lead by atheists or agnostics scientists who DON’T CARE ONE BIT about the Shroud being authentic. Understand me, here I’m not talking about the Walter McCrone of this world but I’m talking about honest scientist who have no preconception about the Shroud (like the majority of the STURP members were by the way). Now, that would be science we can trust because it would not be agenda driven.

And, I think Ray Schneider said it well the other day when he state : “The best of the “enhancements” do present the impression of elements of the Pilate coin, however the elements seem to be out of placement and not in the correct scale, so it may well simply be a case of similarity and not a real image at all. Remember that the folks doing the processing were looking for a particular appearance so there is a selection phenomenon at work which will drive the process to the best apparent fit.”

I think the last phrase is very true even when Marion pretend his method avoid every subjective interpretation. I’m not so sure about that because he knew what he was lookin for and I’m pretty convinced that he wanted badly to find it. By the way, this guy Marion worked with Barbara Frele and both believe also that the ghost writtings represent Jesus death certificate ! So, if you don’t see an agenda behind those claims, you could at least agree with me that there is something fishy about all those researches…

I agree. See the full discussion at Paper Chase: Sight and Brain and Shroud of Turin Images « Shroud of Turin Blog

19 thoughts on “Comment Promoted on Sight and Brain and Shroud of Turin Images”

  1. Neither Marion (as an Ingeneer) nor Guscin (as a linguist) was/is qualified whether as an epigraphist, a paleaographer, an archaeological analyst or cryptanalyst to identify late Greek/Hebrew/Latin ghost impressions/writings on the Shroud.

    Marion commited TOTAL OR PARTIAL FALSE POSITIVES, Guscin TOTAL FALSE NEGATIVES.

    Marion has never worked with Barbara Frale as far as I know. Could Yannick Clément give us his source(s)?

  2. To Yannick Clément:Barrie Schwortz is not only your friend, he is your Guru (himself hiding behind the wrong expert Guscin in terms of paleographic/epigraphic forms to be detected on the cloth). Shroud UNconscience when you prevail!

    1. Wrong. You can ask Barrie, I disagree with him on some points about the Shroud ! ;-) My friend, I can think by myself…

      1. Yannick Clément :
        Wrong. You can ask Barrie, I disagree with him on some points about the Shroud ! ;-) My friend, I can think by myself…

        “By the way, here’s a reading suggestion from my friend Barrie Schwortz for Max” (YC’s quote. So you were telling you can think by yourself, I very doubt so when I read u…

  3. Marion should not have tried to interpret by himself the ghost writings he found. He should have left the identification work to an archaelogical analyst or cryptanalyst.

    ALL THINGS COMPARED, GUSCIN’S VERY BLINDNESS FOR EPIGRAPHIC /PALEAOGRAPHIC FORMS DOES AMOUNT TO MARION’s IGNORANCE OF LATE ANCIENT GREEK.

  4. Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in trather contrast with what u say in so so much disenlighyened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DON’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEU-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION which are just crap.
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

  5. Max Patrick Hamon :

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in trather contrast with what u say in your so much disenlightened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEUDo-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION.
    YOU JUST THINK YOU CAN GET AXWAY WITH YOUR “COMMENT” JUST BECAUSE MARION PASSED AWAY IN 2009 AND CONSEQUENTLY CANNOT DEFEND HIMSELF; ARE YOU A REAL CHRISTIAN OR ANOTHER PAGAN PRETENDING TO BE A CATHOLIC?

  6. Max Patrick Hamon :

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in rather sharp contrast with what u say in so so much disenlighyened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DON’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEU-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION which are just crap.
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

  7. Max Patrick Hamon :

    Max Patrick Hamon :

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in rather sharp contrast with what u say in so so much disenlighyened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DON’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEU-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION which is just crap.
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

  8. Max Patrick Hamon :

    Max Patrick Hamon :

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-
    turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in rather contrast with what u say in your so much disenlightened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEUDo-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION.
    YOU JUST THINK YOU CAN GET AWAY WITH YOUR “COMMENT” JUST BECAUSE MARION PASSED AWAY IN 2009 AND CONSEQUENTLY CANNOT DEFEND HIMSELF; ARE YOU A REAL CHRISTIAN OR ANOTHER PAGAN PRETENDING TO BE A CATHOLIC? SHAME ON YOU!

  9. Max Patrick Hamon :

    Yannick Clément :
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :
    This is in rather sharp contrast with what u say in your so much disenlightened comment. YOU JUST WANT TO TOTALLY DISCREDIT MARION’S WORK JUST BECAUSE IT DOESN’T FIT IN WITH YOU PSEUDO-INTELLECTUAL CONSTRUCTION which is just crap.
    If she didn’t work directly with Marion, she used his conclusions to confort his own hypothesis about a death certificate : http://news.discovery.com/history/big-pic-shroud-turin-claim.html

    Yannick Clément :

  10. THERE ARE GHOST WRITINGS AND IMPRESSIONS ON THE SHROUD FACE. MARION JUST MISREAD MOST OF THEM AND GUSCIN WHO IS NOT QUALIFIED AS AN EPIGRAPHIST, A PALMAEOGRAPHER,AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYST OR CRYPTANALIST JUST COULD NOT SEE THEM WITH HIS UNINITIATED EYES. PERIOD

  11. Max Patrick Hamon :
    THERE ARE GHOST WRITINGS AND IMPRESSIONS ON THE SHROUD FACE. MARION JUST MISREAD MOST OF THEM AND GUSCIN WHO IS NOT QUALIFIED AS AN EPIGRAPHIST, A PALAEOGRAPHER,AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ANALYST OR CRYPTANALIST JUST COULD NOT SEE THEM WITH HIS UNINITIATED EYES. PERIOD

Comments are closed.